Campbell Ogilvie was an executive director of Rangers for the first five years of their Employee Benefit Trusts and during their earlier illegally-executed tax avoidance Discount Options Scheme. He received a ‘loan’ from a Rangers EBT, which he has not repaid and is not expected to repay, and recently described his company responsibilities during this period to a friendly journalist as being administrative, and then legislative.
He has been a director of the SFA for 22 years and is now president.
During the period when Ogilvie was director of both Rangers and the SFA the club illegally registered dozens of footballers with the SFA. All directors are responsible for actions of a company, executive directors especially so. Those who represent themselves as having administrative and legislative roles, absolutely so.
SFA chief executive, Stewart Regan, yesterday defended Ogilvie’s shameless refusal to resign by offering a defence which echoed Rangers ‘Craig Whyte acted alone’ defence, which was comprehensively dismissed by the SFA Judicial Tribunal.
Regan said, “We have had very clear feedback that the president was not involved in any letter or correspondence with regards to player EBTs.
“We are all aware of businesses being run where you have one owner and operator running the club and a number of directors sitting below. The way this process has been managed, a lot of this correspondence was done much higher up the chain than Campbell Ogilvie.”
This is cringe-worthy nonsense and gets to the heart of the lack of corporate governance at the SFA. Mr Regan is not qualified to assure us that Mr Ogilvie has no case to answer. That is not a judgement for him to make and is certainly not an inference that can be made on the basis of private comments from Mr Ogilvie or other former Rangers directors similarly contaminated by this issue.
Before the chief executive can state as fact how Rangers conducted their business, and the limited involvement of Mr Ogilvie, some form of inquiry must have taken place. No such inquiry happened.
“We have had very clear feedback”, said Mr Regan. Who is “we”, was it an independent panel that received this feedback, or did Mr Regan deal with this personally? Who gave the feedback? Was Mr Ogilvie subject to the same independent scrutiny as anyone else in the game, from Neil Lennon to Craig Whyte, or was this passed off with a handshake?
Mr Regan’s failure to recognise the serious corporate governance failures in his conduct is alarming. We don’t need this guy to know the offside rule but he has to understand good corporate governance requires questions against your president to be openly and independently investigated.
When these are our standards, what else is the executive turning a blind eye to?
Mr Regan was careful to limit his claim on what Mr Ogilvie was not party to. “We have had very clear feedback that the president was not involved in any letter or correspondence with regards to player EBTs” sounds like a substantial piece of information but it’s not.
This only claims that Mr Ogilvie did not author any side letter or contract relating to an EBT, which is not in doubt. The important issue is clearly Mr Ogilvie knew dozens of players had EBTs, he knew football players’ remuneration is subject to detailed written contracts and he knew all money paid to a player, from any source, in relation to football, must be detailed on his contract and registered with the SFA.
For Rangers players’ EBTs to be consistent with SFA and Fifa requirements they would need to be completely discretionary, an optional extra the players were unable to rely on. Mr Ogilvie, the Great Football Administrator, knew all of this.
Instead of good corporate governance we appear to have a self-certified president – we know Mr Ogilvie did nothing wrong because Mr Ogilvie said he did nothing wrong. He is at once, a Great Football Administrator and unaware of the football administration actions of the company he was legally responsible for.
Ogilvie was an executive director of Rangers. It was his responsibility as a director of Rangers to ensure that the club contracts and legislative responsibilities were conducted in a proper manner. He was simultaneously a director of the SFA. It was his responsibility as a director of the SFA to ensure the Association was run in an even-handed manner, that one club – his club or any other – could not load the dice.
Regan went on to say “Since February 14 he has had no involvement at all in any board meetings, any decisions or any meetings with the club.”
It is reassuring that he has withdrawn from an important part of the legislative process of the SFA but his prominent participation in yesterday’s AGM confirms that his influence in other areas remains.
Regan added “[EBTs] are illegal if they are used knowingly in an incorrect manner. That is something we are still waiting for facts on. But I am satisfied that Campbell has discharged his duty of care. He has done everything we could have asked of him and, so far as his integrity is concerned, he is a man with many years as a highly respected administrator across the game of football in Scotland.”
“So far as his integrity is concerned….many years …. respected administrator”. Those words may bring to mind all those years Ogilvie was at Ibrox while Rangers sectarian signing policy was in place.
Regan dismissed calls for his own resignation, no doubt confident he can self-certify his performance.
I am hugely reluctant to open a political debate, but does the painful lack of accountability and scrutiny in Scotland not alarm you? The actions (inactions) of Ogilvie and Regan would never be accepted in England, where structures exist to hold officials to account. As a relic from Rangers sectarian signing policy days, Ogilvie would be regarded as an embarrassing dinosaur, he would never be made president! The ability for officials to state facts without an inquiry would never be tolerated.
We look more like a rotten borough than a country with the mechanisms necessary to nurture a successful state. Where’s your voice now, Mr Salmond?
942 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- ...
- 25
- »
‘Rangers could backtrack and accept transfer ban’
Evening Times
* cue FF meltdown *
bournesouprecipe on 7 June, 2012 at 18:01 said:
Like they have a great choice!!!
Comedians the lotta of them..
Ard Macha,
You around?
I’ll be in sunny Larkhall next Saturday.. ..
starry
Even the tempered sanitised comments in the Times, are rabid.
TheyStillDon’tGetIt CSC
Dave King, like Alistair Johnston, sleeze bag. “Entitlement”
Seriously ?
Craig Whyte is going to sue the SFA. His lawyers’ fees will be made up of advance sales of the seats in the gallery.
@greghemphill
” we have seen in recent weeks how difficult it is to get anyone to put money into a football club.”
Our Hero,still in there pitchin’ and bitchin’
Things you’ll not see written down in the minutes of SFA meetings:
After you on the goat, Campbell old boy………..
Feel free to add.
You gotta laugh.
Craig Whyte: “It has certainly been eventful year but I did what needed to be done, unpopular as it was. There was no alternative. It had to be done.”
It had to be done. I wish I’d done it.
miki67
My feelings over this charade vary from anger to joy mixed with anxiety, disbelief, excitement and depression.
Today has been one of the least uplifting of recent times.
I have fluxed from deciding to finish with scottish fitba’ forever to bursting with indignant pride over my love of Celtic.
I have always hated the Rankers and, as I have become older, have been pushed into realising that the country of my birth is more concerned with protecting the power base of the corrupt old guard than moving towards enlightment.
I now hate my country for how it has caused me to turn against it!
I am glad I live in England.
I will always love Celtic (regardless of the inaction of our board)
I still have a dream that one day we will play on that realisable level playing field but we will never be allowed that equality in Scotland.
Like the Rankers, it is a country with no Shame!
How could the GB encapsulate this in a slogan?
Scotland’s shame is Scotland!
HH and keep up the good fight!
Glendalystonsils likes a mr whippy with his lime green jelly on 7 June, 2012 at 18:11 said:
“Bas**rd!, I’ve spilt something on my apron”.
Tidied up just two of the comments from RM.:))))
Never a f###in quiet day . f@@@in shambles
(where’s the guy McColl fae Clyde blowers ffs ,when needed , could he no team up with Hunter and be a new preffered bidder )
—————-
Sick of the f*%#ing lot of them, wish Walter would win the euromillions.
———————-
:)))))
merseycelt lmfao as the big house door slams shut on 7 June, 2012 at 18:13 said:
Have you renewed your season ticket?
NO GREEN AND WHYTE AT IBROX
I have continued to observe the lack of
progress in the attempts to resolve the crisis
at Ibrox. I hoped that a “supportable”
proposal would emerge from an individual
or grouping that would meet the needs of
the club. I see those needs comprising of
four main components;
1.Any offer should demonstrate the capacity
to not only acquire the club but to invest in
the club going forward.
2.Any offer should be supported by the
requisite business skills to ensure that the
recent crisis is not repeated.
3.Any offer should recognise that the club
cannot be run on purely business principles.
The club has a “soul”, a history, and a
tradition going back 140 years. Our children
and grandchildren are entitled to the same
legacy that our father’s and grandfather’s
bequeathed to us.
4.Any offer should recognise that the fans
are key stakeholders in the club, whether
they are shareholders or not.
In my view the CVA proposal that is being
put forward for consideration by Duff &
Phelps fails to demonstrate compliance with
any of the above criteria. I accept the
possibility that Duff and Phelps may know
more than is contained in the CVA proposal,
but if that is the case, why the lack of
transparency? Duff & Phelps have earned
enormous sums as administrators and have
had sufficient time to ensure that full
disclosure is made with any offer.
One practical difficulty that Duff and Phelps
has is that their prime responsibility is to
those stakeholders that have a legal claim
on the company. This excludes the many
fans who are important stakeholders but not
shareholders. This leads me to some
specific concerns about the CVA proposal;
1.It is clear from the CVA proposal that Mr
Green intends to repeat Mr Whyte’s strategy
of using season ticket sales to fund the club.
This would put fans back in the position of
funding the club without owning it.
2.I made it clear to Duff and Phelps that I
regard the Whyte acquisition of the shares
from the Murray Group as being fraudulent
and that myself and every other minority
shareholder (all fan shareholders) have
been prejudiced by this. The CVA gives no
recognition to this difficulty and to what
reparation will be made to those
shareholders who have been abused by the
terms of the sale to Mr Whyte.
3.I also advised Duff & Phelps that I was
making a claim against the club for the full
amount of my investment based on the
deliberate non-disclosure by David Murray
of transactions that he had committed to on
behalf of the club that were both risky and
to the sole advantage of the Murray Group. I
have made that claim but Duff & Phelps
have at this stage ignored my
representations.
4.If it becomes necessary for me to prove
my claim I intend to enlist the support of the
other fans, like me, who are shareholders in
order to ensure that we are all considered
and represented. I further advised Duff &
Phelps that any proceeds received in
respect of my claim will be reinvested, in
full, back into the club. I am sure that all
other aggrieved investors (that are fans) will
do likewise. This will ensure that a
substantial portion of the funds used to
acquire the club will still be available to
invest in its future.
5.Mr Whyte gave me first right of refusal on
his shares on the 29th September 2011.
Andrew Ellis subsequently advised me that
Mr Whyte had personally advised him about
my first right of refusal but that Mr Ellis had
a prior right to 24,9% of the shareholding
from Mr Whyte. Based on my own history of
dealings with Mr Whyte I have no reason to
doubt Mr Ellis’s version. Either way, Mr
Green cannot acquire the shares.
It is not my intention, and I know Mr Ellis
feels the same, to get in the way of a
properly structured and a properly funded
transaction that meets the needs of all
stakeholders, including the fans.
In my view, based on previous discussions
with Mr Whyte, it is unlikely in the extreme
that he would sell “his” shares to Mr Green
for a nominal sum (even if he hadn’t
committed them to me) unless he was
obtaining some benefit or retaining some
control behind the scenes. Duff & Phelps
non-communicative approach to
stakeholders causes me further concern in
that regard.
I am opposing the CVA and urge all loyal
fans to do the same. We don’t want to be
back in a similar situation next season. I
also believe that all true Rangers fans
should not buy any season tickets until full
and frank disclosure has been provided by
Duff & Phelps, Mr Green, and Mr Whyte, as
to what is truly going on behind the scenes.
Dave King
Johannesburg
7th June 2012
Paul67, excellent lead as usual. The lack of scutiny throughout this sorry saga is not something most business minded people will have experienced before. I was giving the SFA the benefit of the doubt, but unless the appeal tribunal show some mettle, then I don’t think my confidence that justice will be served will be well placed. The football authorities in our country need to be stripped down and rebuilt from the ground up. The incompetence is truly staggering – and the worse thing is, they don’t think anything is wrong, “Just a bunch of paranoia Celtic supporters moaning again”. We need to keep up the pressure and pray that justice will come. We truly deserve it. Be patient and keep the faith.HH
lochgoilhead bhoy
Geography and a young family restrict me in this respect.
Why do you ask?
HH
Glendalystonsils likes a mr whippy with his lime green jelly on 7 June, 2012 at 18:11 said
Neil Lennon is innocent
Glendalystonsils likes a mr whippy with his lime green jelly on 7 June, 2012 at 18:11 said
Rangers are guilty
HH
If and when the huns get the golden pardon verdict to let them carry on regardless as we’re all in the same lodge together – at that point Celtic should appeal the decision at the same court that overturned their transfer ban – any legal (or even non legal!) mind looking at the sequence of events leading up to the decision enabling them to carry on as usual would be gobsmacked and smell a mason hun rat immediately.
Dave King Superstar
Walks like a woman
And he wears a Bra
70’s Chants CSC
Paul67
In relation to your leader.
What do you expect Celtic to do about this wash over?
TT
Nothing to see on STV Sports News
*Hmmmm*
The Moon Bhoys Fella the legal system and the judiciary in Scotland is full off rolled up trouser legs abd funny handshakes.We are in the minority and the longer this fiasco is allowed to drag on the more decent people will get fed up with it all and walk away and leave them to it.This is part of there long term game plan.H.H.
Just caught the stv news. I see that Sally is making plans for pre-season games in France and Spain.
Guess nothing saignificant has happened today then.
France or Spain it’s all the same we’ll go anywhere….
oops thats ooor song….
Gordon J. I would say it is a sign of there confidence that they will survive in some shape or form that allows them to discuss pre-season plans.H.H.
Agree with you Joe but maybe Celtic will be watching the transfer ban fiasco with interest and if the huns get a result use the same process to appeal any major decisions they don’t like – such as a golden pardon for the huns.
jimbob71 on 7 June, 2012 at 18:05 said:,
You looking me?
Árd Macha
Eddie @BhoyEddie
So according to http://local.stv.tv/glasgow/105193-hmrc-arrange-for-liquidators-at-rangers-if-administrators-fail-to-save-club/ if CVA rejected D&P cannot sell assets to Green or anyone else #closingdownsale organised by BDO
Breaking down the walls of heartache….
I have been reading the posts/threads since the dark side problems started and have to say the comments on this one are the most downbeat of the lot. And I too am beginning to think the scum are going to get of with this with a slap on the wrist. Sad times if this is so!
2 quick points:
1. Isn’t the existence of player payments separate to their wages enough to convict the huns with sporting sanctions regardless of whether the judges rule they were used inappropriately (in a tax sense)?
2. I can’t believe the firm BDO were referred to as “neutral insolvency firm” today by STV. If they are “neutral”, what does that infer D&P are?
“Bored,bored,bored,bored,bored,bored,bored,bored” Vyvyan ,The Young Ones circa 1984
bfdj should stick to doing what he does best
EATING PIES
HH
Dave King statement makes headline news on BBC Reporting Scotland
ASonOfDan on 7 June, 2012 at 18:16:
You have obviously edited that piece by Dave King. You have obviously removed the paragraph where he says sorry for rangers fleecing innocent parties to the tune of £130M, and a commitment on his part to help pay back these debts.
Big Mike. I have said since this fiasco started that Scottish Football is at the crossroads and if as looks likely Rangers return with a light punishment imo thousands of fans up and down the country will walk away from the game.Why would anyone want to spend there hard earned cash supporting a corupt football league? So the funny hand shakers may win there battle but lose the war. H.H.
Excellent article once again Paul,
What can we as individuals , collectively as a support and possibly as shareholders do to force the SFA /SPL into applying the rules against THE CHEATS as laid down ( without Masonic tinkering).
Surely by treating THE CHEATS as a special case they are adversely affecting all other clubs , both on the field and off the field financially ( this is where the shareholder bit comes in ). We need leadership , so that we can mobilise and fight this corruption , until truth and justice prevail.
Any clues on where Celtic are at this particular moment on this situation ?
Hail Hail